Thursday, March 9, 2017

MAR 09, 2017 LENR PREPARING FOR THE PRO-NiH BATTLE

MOTTO

Excess of Freedom. Any responsibility is seen as an offense. (Valeriu Butulescu)(I have just received two books with aphorisms by Butulescu and other Romanian authors. A good friend has created a new publishing company Digital Unicorn.Remember, I predict the publisher has a great future)

DAILY NOTESToday I am preparing for essential battles, LENR is in danger.a) Why we must put emphasis on high temperature, vapor phase transition metals- hydrogen LENR and stop those who want to kill now NiH.One reason- Pd will never be an energy technology, see please what I wrote today on the LENR Forum:

Total installed power worldwide is approx 12 TW

(teraWatts, 1 tera= 1000giga= 1000000 M)

The first 20 countries have 5.7 TW, China -1.2, USA 1.1 TW)

For palladium you can count on a yearly world production of

200 tons.

Suppose all goes to CF energy production and100W/g are attained (1 W/g is more realistic now.

Cold fusion will generate then

200,000,000x 100= 20,000, 000,000W that is 0. 02 TW interesting but not significant.

(BTW it is as 20 Doral plants)

PdD was wonderful for discovery and for obtaining the certainty that CF exists but not for application.

It si also not good for theoretical studies going farther than the standard Storms theory because commercial cold fusion (LENR) has a high temperature

component- continuous generation and re generation of active sites, a dynamic mechanism allowing high energy density as excess heat- and this is missing from PdD a la F&P Cell

PdD at higher temperatures Kirkinskii working with PdD at 600C has obtained 20W/g.

Please do not kill NiH! It is not a mockingbird but the Swan/goose laying golden energy eggs.

Later my opponent told 300W/cc Pd is a better value, that is 25 W/g and the simplest calculation gives a total power of 0.005 TW, really not much.

Answering to reader GAMMA re LENR TheoryIs this reader a new voice, I have no idea- but see what he writes:"can we remain absolutely certain that without a complete theory we should not try any technological research?".

With respect, that's a loaded question fishing for a desired answer. An equally loaded question would be, "Is there any purpose in racing ahead with technological research without first attempting to understand the science?".

Even an incomplete theory would be more than helpful. What is missing are fundamental experimental data, the questions as to what are the fuels, what are the products, where do the reactions occur, what is so special about nickel or palladium, why is external energy required? Even without these data, theorists have proposed their models, but almost all of them fall over at the first hurdle: the absence of penetrating radiation. The usual explanations are quite unscientific. Ad hoc assumptions are made, new but unspecified physics is invoked, accepted experimental and theoretical facts are ignored without justification.

Technological research into LENR, without understanding of the underlying processes, has not produced hoped for results. The technology is still unreliable at best. And no government is going to authorize the use of any unknown nuclear technology for commercial use. So my view is that technological research, and in particular the unscientific obsession with excess heat, is a waste of valuable resources.

Of course to every hammer, every problem looks like a nail. And the same is true of engineers who want to develop a potential technology. Such people need to understand that a complicated problem needs a multi-disciplinary team. Even theorists are required! My answerI have actually pre-answered It is about a form of simultaneity, technology is a sine qua non part of theory. And LENT needs a theoryplex not a single theory.Gamma, please read my 6 Pillars of LENR and we will continue the discussion.Have no idea who you are, my instinct says you could be a good discussion partner. The most important thing I want to tell you is that in solving really difficult problems, we many times cannot do what has to be done according to strong rules, we do what we can, with what we have (and lots of important things are missing), how we can- and if we fail we have to be fast in trying again"Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,

And stoop and build ’em up with worn-out tools: "

Valuable research is NOT easy.DAILY NEWS1) From the Pacermonitor of the MIAMI Court re the Rossi vs Darden litigation

Dear Andrea!1. Will only E-cat quark-X be manufactured in Sweden, or also the more powerful E-cats?2. Do you already have a factory facility prepared for E-cats in Sweden?Sweden has got a bad reputation these days, so we really need some positive news!

Best regardsNils FryklundAndrea RossiMarch 9, 2017 at 1:10 PM

Nils Fryklund:1- All our products2- Not yetSweden remains one of the most beautiful places to stay in the world.Warm Regards,A.R.

13 comments:

Ah me. It is totally ridiculous to start a war between Pd and Ni. It is far too early in the research process to make ANY absolutist comments of that sort. For all we know, the ultimate LENR winner may be an entirely different substrate. There are many venues, from tungsten through alloys (iron-titanium) to carbon nanotubes. Any material that can soak up large quantities of hydrogen is a potential candidate.

Since Rossi does not understand what processes are at work in his LENR reaction, he cannot properly optimize the energy produced by that reaction. We know from Leif Holmlid's research, most of the energy that is generated by the reaction goes toward muon production. If those muons were optimized in an invention that uses them to produce energy, then the LENR reaction would be properly harnessed. As it stands now, most energy produced by LENR is wasted.

Very interesting to see the court battle between Rossi and IH taking shape. I'm not sure which way it'll go. It's getting me quite hot and bothered and my eWig in a real twist. Need to get lubed up to allow easy access for my new calorimeter.

Hi Peter, I said "it'll" go, not "I'll" go. Having said that you have given new a good idea. U might just turn up at the trial to cheer on the participants. It will be a full on circle jerk the likes we have not been involved in since ecatnews went offline. Will you join us Peter?

There is an explanation of the Cold Fusion process, just as there is a Model which can be called the "Grail of Physics.

Unfortunately they are both the product of the wrong aocio-economic stratum of North American Society. The originator is a "PWT/PhD"(An ove-reducated honkey without significant resourcees or social status.) The "Grail" explanation is the Oscillators in a Substance Model " and the explanation of "cold fusion" devolves naturaly from it. The model has been around on the internet for a decade, carefully ignored as the originator is an independent who "Has to be a Crackpot." The model also is very iconoclastic, debunking icons from Black Holes to the Big Bang. It probably will receive some acceptance after the death of the originator. Heaven forbid that anyone be recognized until after their death, especially if they are independent theorists..

There is an explanation of the Cold Fusion process, just as there is a Model which can be called the "Grail of Physics.

Unfortunately they are both the product of the wrong aocio-economic stratum of North American Society. The originator is a "PWT/PhD"(An ove-reducated honkey without significant resourcees or social status.) The "Grail" explanation is the Oscillators in a Substance Model " and the explanation of "cold fusion" devolves naturaly from it. The model has been around on the internet for a decade, carefully ignored as the originator is an independent who "Has to be a Crackpot." The model also is very iconoclastic, debunking icons from Black Holes to the Big Bang. It probably will receive some acceptance after the death of the originator. Heaven forbid that anyone be recognized until after their death, especially if they are independent theorists..